Document Type
Article
Publication Date
5-2-2003
Abstract
Examination of mutual fund selection and evaluation practices revealed post revision disclosure ineffectiveness rooted in deficient transparency. Observations of and interviews with investment club members evidenced that disclosure failed to warn participants of detrimental costs and adverse consequences. Emergent topics, together with those theorized in the literature, included prospectus transparency, terminology comprehension, cost awareness, and consequential effects. Topical data conflation created a composite picture of fee awareness and implication familiarity. Contrived terminology contributed to erroneous interpretations. Members underestimated costs in all examined periods and found fee tables exceptionally confusing. Unrealistically low return assumptions and limited reporting periods did more to mask than to clarify costs. Confusing constructs worked together to deter participant awareness of forgone prosperity dissipated through unproductive fees.
Keywords
mutual funds
Rights
© The Author(s). Kelvin Smith Library provides access for non-commercial, personal, or research use only. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic means or otherwise, without prior written permission is strictly prohibited.
Department/Center
Design & Innovation
Recommended Citation
Walker, Gary A., "Deconstructing The Pervasive Adequate Disclosure Debate" (2003). Student Scholarship. 159.
https://commons.case.edu/studentworks/159